pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.19216 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-21 · 💻 cs.CV

An Object-Centered Data Acquisition Method for 3D Gaussian Splatting using Mobile Phones

Yuezhe Zhang , Luqian Bai , Mengting Yu , Lei Wei , Shuai Wan , Yifan Zhang This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 02:26 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CV
keywords 3D Gaussian Splattingmobile captureobject-centered acquisitionviewpoint coveragesensor guidancespherical grid3D reconstruction
0
0 comments X

The pith

Mobile phone sensor tracking and real-time spherical guidance produce higher-quality 3D Gaussian Splatting reconstructions of objects from fewer images than freehand or app-based capture.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Capturing objects for 3D Gaussian Splatting with a mobile phone is difficult because random shots often leave gaps in viewpoint coverage. The paper presents an on-device system that uses the phone's sensors to record orientations, aligns them to a baseline frame after calibration, and projects the camera's optical axis onto an object-centered spherical grid. Area-weighted coverage is computed live to steer the user toward unsampled directions. This produces more uniform and complete viewpoint sets that deliver better reconstruction quality while requiring fewer input images than unrestricted capture or the RealityScan app.

Core claim

After calibration the device orientations are aligned to a baseline frame to obtain relative poses, and the optical axis of the camera is mapped to an object-centered spherical grid for uniform viewpoint indexing; real-time area-weighted spherical coverage then guides the user's motion so that the resulting image set yields superior reconstruction quality using fewer input images and more comprehensive uniform viewpoint coverage than free capture or RealityScan.

What carries the argument

Object-centered spherical grid that indexes camera optical axes by orientation, combined with real-time area-weighted coverage computation to direct user motion and record sensor poses for later reconstruction.

If this is right

  • Mobile phones become practical high-quality capture devices for object-centric 3DGS without extra hardware.
  • Fewer photographs suffice for reconstructions of comparable or better fidelity.
  • Recorded sensor data can be reused offline to refine poses after the capture session.
  • Real-time coverage feedback reduces the chance of missing critical viewpoints around an object.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same guidance loop could be adapted for other neural rendering pipelines that also depend on dense viewpoint sampling.
  • The spherical-grid approach might lower the need for later view-selection or densification steps in the reconstruction pipeline.
  • Objects with extreme aspect ratios or strong specular highlights could expose where the area-weighted spherical assumption breaks.

Load-bearing premise

Calibrated onboard sensors give accurate enough relative poses, and mapping the optical axis to the spherical grid produces truly uniform coverage no matter the object's shape or lighting.

What would settle it

Capture the same physical object three ways (guided method, freehand, RealityScan), run identical 3DGS training on each set, and check whether the guided set produces measurably higher PSNR or lower LPIPS with fewer images; failure to do so falsifies the quality claim.

read the original abstract

Data acquisition through mobile phones remains a challenge for 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS). In this work we target the object-centered scenario and enable reliable mobile acquisition by providing on-device capture guidance and recording onboard sensor signals for offline reconstruction. After the calibration step, the device orientations are aligned to a baseline frame to obtain relative poses, and the optical axis of the camera is mapped to an object-centered spherical grid for uniform viewpoint indexing. To curb polar sampling bias, we compute area-weighted spherical coverage in real-time and guide the user's motion accordingly. We compare the proposed method with RealityScan and the free-capture strategy. Our method achieves superior reconstruction quality using fewer input images compared to free capture and RealityScan. Further analysis shows that the proposed method is able to obtain more comprehensive and uniform viewpoint coverage during object-centered acquisition.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript describes an object-centered data acquisition pipeline for 3D Gaussian Splatting on mobile phones. After sensor calibration, device orientations are aligned to a baseline frame to derive relative poses; the camera optical axis is indexed on an object-centered spherical grid, and real-time area-weighted coverage is computed to guide user motion and reduce polar bias. Onboard signals are recorded for offline reconstruction. The central claim is that the guided method produces superior 3DGS reconstruction quality with fewer images and more uniform viewpoint coverage than free capture or RealityScan.

Significance. If the quantitative claims hold, the work offers a practical, low-cost solution to the data-acquisition bottleneck in 3DGS by turning commodity phones into guided capture devices. The combination of IMU-based orientation alignment with area-weighted spherical feedback is a concrete engineering contribution that could improve accessibility of high-quality neural rendering without requiring specialized hardware or expert users.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the method 'achieves superior reconstruction quality using fewer input images' and 'more comprehensive and uniform viewpoint coverage' is stated without any quantitative metrics (PSNR, SSIM, coverage percentages), error bars, dataset descriptions, or controlled comparison protocol. This absence makes the primary empirical result impossible to evaluate from the provided text.
  2. [Method] Method section (pose estimation paragraph): relative poses are obtained solely by aligning device orientations to a baseline frame; no description is given of translation estimation, visual bundle adjustment, or drift correction. If IMU orientation drift exceeds a few degrees or the assumed fixed-radius sphere deviates from actual camera paths, the claimed uniform spherical coverage and the superiority over RealityScan (which uses visual SLAM) cannot be attributed to the guidance method.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Method] A diagram illustrating the spherical grid indexing and area-weighting computation would clarify the real-time guidance procedure.
  2. [Experiments] The comparison section should explicitly state the number of images used in each condition and the exact 3DGS training protocol to allow reproducibility.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on the abstract and method section. We address each point below and indicate where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that the method 'achieves superior reconstruction quality using fewer input images' and 'more comprehensive and uniform viewpoint coverage' is stated without any quantitative metrics (PSNR, SSIM, coverage percentages), error bars, dataset descriptions, or controlled comparison protocol. This absence makes the primary empirical result impossible to evaluate from the provided text.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including quantitative support for the claims. The detailed experimental results, including PSNR and SSIM values, image counts, and coverage metrics from controlled comparisons against free capture and RealityScan, appear in the Experiments section. In the revision we will incorporate key numerical highlights (e.g., average PSNR improvement and coverage uniformity percentages) directly into the abstract while preserving its concise nature. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Method] Method section (pose estimation paragraph): relative poses are obtained solely by aligning device orientations to a baseline frame; no description is given of translation estimation, visual bundle adjustment, or drift correction. If IMU orientation drift exceeds a few degrees or the assumed fixed-radius sphere deviates from actual camera paths, the claimed uniform spherical coverage and the superiority over RealityScan (which uses visual SLAM) cannot be attributed to the guidance method.

    Authors: The acquisition pipeline derives relative poses from orientation alignment to a baseline frame and indexes the camera optical axis on an object-centered spherical grid; the guidance system operates on these orientation-derived directions. Translation is not estimated on-device because the method targets object-centered capture with user-guided motion around a roughly consistent distance; the recorded sensor signals are used for offline 3DGS reconstruction. No on-device visual bundle adjustment or explicit drift correction is performed. We will revise the method section to explicitly state the orientation-only pose derivation, the fixed-distance assumption implicit in the spherical grid, and the reliance on offline refinement, thereby clarifying how the guidance contributes to the observed coverage and reconstruction gains. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: procedural pipeline with independent empirical validation

full rationale

The paper describes a sensor-driven acquisition pipeline (calibration, orientation alignment to baseline, optical-axis mapping to area-weighted spherical grid for real-time guidance) followed by offline 3DGS reconstruction. No equations or derivations are presented that reduce outputs to inputs by construction; claims of superior quality and uniform coverage rest on direct experimental comparisons to RealityScan and free capture rather than fitted parameters, self-definitional relations, or self-citation chains. The method is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The method rests on standard mobile vision assumptions about sensor accuracy and geometric mapping with no explicitly fitted parameters or new entities introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Device orientations can be aligned to a baseline frame using onboard sensor signals after calibration to obtain reliable relative poses.
    Invoked for the pose computation step that enables spherical grid mapping.
  • domain assumption Mapping the camera optical axis to an object-centered spherical grid enables uniform viewpoint indexing and area-weighted coverage computation.
    Core premise for the real-time guidance mechanism.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5454 in / 1371 out tokens · 52589 ms · 2026-05-10T02:26:35.666695+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

25 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    INTRODUCTION 3D Gaussian Splatting (3DGS) [1] has recently emerged as a promising neural scene representation that strikes an ef- fective balance between high rendering fidelity and real-time performance [2]. By modeling scenes with anisotropic Gaus- sian primitives and leveraging differentiable rasterization, 3DGS enables a real-time training-and-renderi...

  2. [2]

    We map orientations estimated from mobile phones’ IMU to an object-centered spherical coordinate system

  3. [3]

    We provide real-time feedback of area-weighted spher- ical coverage to guide users during data acquisition to im- prove angular uniformity and completeness

  4. [4]

    An Object-Centered Data Acquisition Method for 3D Gaussian Splatting using Mobile Phones

    We introduce a dual-mode stability gate based on smoothed linear acceleration and angular velocity, to ensure arXiv:2604.19216v1 [cs.CV] 21 Apr 2026 Fig. 2: Object-centered spherical coordinate mapping and coverage update workflow. The baseline rotationR 0 =R(q(0))is obtained from the initial quaternionq(0). During data acquisition, the device records qua...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  5. [5]

    2, the pipeline performs IMU-based pose ac- quisition, spherical mapping, and online coverage

    CAMERA POSE MODELING AND SPHERICAL COORDINA TE COMPUTA TION As shown in Fig. 2, the pipeline performs IMU-based pose ac- quisition, spherical mapping, and online coverage. Inputs are q(t),a(t),ω(t). After stability gate,q(t)→R(q), aligned withR 0 to yieldR rel [11]; the viewing direction isv= Rrelez with angles(θ, ϕ). Each accepted frame updates its spher...

  6. [6]

    The test set comprises three tabletop objects in Fig

    RESULTS AND ANALYSIS Experiments utilize a Redmi K70 Pro for capture and an NVIDIA RTX 5090D GPU for off-device 3DGS reconstruc- tion. The test set comprises three tabletop objects in Fig. 4. Table 1: Comparison of Free capture, RealityScan, and our method in terms of the number of captured images and reconstruc- tion quality when scanning objects. [14] [...

  7. [7]

    CONCLUSION We present an object-centered, real-time mobile capture method that integrates uniform viewpoint indexing with IMU- guided online coverage estimation. The proposed approach enables more uniform and complete multi-view acquisition under handheld conditions, consistently improving recon- struction quality while requiring fewer input images. We ma...

  8. [8]

    3d gaus- sian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.,

    Bernhard Kerbl, Georgios Kopanas, Thomas Leimk¨uhler, George Drettakis, et al., “3d gaus- sian splatting for real-time radiance field rendering.,” ACM Trans. Graph., vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 1–14, 2023

    2023

  9. [9]

    Neural radiance field-based visual rendering: A comprehensive review,

    Mingyuan Yao, Yukang Huo, Yang Ran, Qingbin Tian, Ruifeng Wang, and Haihua Wang, “Neural radiance field-based visual rendering: A comprehensive review,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.00714, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  10. [10]

    Instant neural graphics primitives with a multiresolution hash encoding,

    Thomas M ¨uller, Alex Evans, Christoph Schied, and Alexander Keller, “Instant neural graphics primitives with a multiresolution hash encoding,”ACM transac- tions on graphics (TOG), vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 1–15, 2022

    2022

  11. [11]

    Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,

    Ben Mildenhall, Pratul P Srinivasan, Matthew Tancik, Jonathan T Barron, Ravi Ramamoorthi, and Ren Ng, “Nerf: Representing scenes as neural radiance fields for view synthesis,”Communications of the ACM, vol. 65, no. 1, pp. 99–106, 2021

    2021

  12. [12]

    Regnerf: Regularizing neural radiance fields for view synthesis from sparse inputs,

    Michael Niemeyer, Jonathan T Barron, Ben Mildenhall, Mehdi SM Sajjadi, Andreas Geiger, and Noha Radwan, “Regnerf: Regularizing neural radiance fields for view synthesis from sparse inputs,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2022, pp. 5480–5490

    2022

  13. [13]

    4d gaussian splatting for real-time dynamic scene rendering,

    Guanjun Wu, Taoran Yi, Jiemin Fang, Lingxi Xie, Xi- aopeng Zhang, Wei Wei, Wenyu Liu, Qi Tian, and Xinggang Wang, “4d gaussian splatting for real-time dynamic scene rendering,” inProceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2024, pp. 20310–20320

    2024

  14. [14]

    Vins-mono: A robust and versatile monocular visual-inertial state es- timator,

    Tong Qin, Peiliang Li, and Shaojie Shen, “Vins-mono: A robust and versatile monocular visual-inertial state es- timator,”IEEE transactions on robotics, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1004–1020, 2018

    2018

  15. [15]

    Structure-from-motion revisited,

    Johannes L Schonberger and Jan-Michael Frahm, “Structure-from-motion revisited,” inProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2016, pp. 4104–4113

    2016

  16. [16]

    A multi-view stereo benchmark with high-resolution images and multi-camera videos,

    Thomas Schops, Johannes L Schonberger, Silvano Gal- liani, Torsten Sattler, Konrad Schindler, Marc Pollefeys, and Andreas Geiger, “A multi-view stereo benchmark with high-resolution images and multi-camera videos,” inProceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vi- sion and pattern recognition, 2017, pp. 3260–3269

    2017

  17. [17]

    A multi-state constraint kalman filter for vision-aided in- ertial navigation,

    Anastasios I Mourikis and Stergios I Roumeliotis, “A multi-state constraint kalman filter for vision-aided in- ertial navigation,” inProceedings 2007 IEEE interna- tional conference on robotics and automation. IEEE, 2007, pp. 3565–3572

    2007

  18. [18]

    Uni- fied temporal and spatial calibration for multi-sensor systems,

    Paul Furgale, Joern Rehder, and Roland Siegwart, “Uni- fied temporal and spatial calibration for multi-sensor systems,” in2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 2013, pp. 1280–1286

    2013

  19. [19]

    Robert Goodell Brown,Smoothing, forecasting and pre- diction of discrete time series, Courier Corporation, 2004

    2004

  20. [20]

    Nonlinear complementary filters on the special or- thogonal group,

    Robert Mahony, Tarek Hamel, and Jean-Michel Pflim- lin, “Nonlinear complementary filters on the special or- thogonal group,”IEEE Transactions on automatic con- trol, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 1203–1218, 2008

    2008

  21. [21]

    Image quality assessment: from error vis- ibility to structural similarity,

    Zhou Wang, Alan C Bovik, Hamid R Sheikh, and Eero P Simoncelli, “Image quality assessment: from error vis- ibility to structural similarity,”IEEE transactions on image processing, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 600–612, 2004

    2004

  22. [22]

    Advantages of the mean absolute error (mae) over the root mean square error (rmse) in assessing average model performance,

    Cort J Willmott and Kenji Matsuura, “Advantages of the mean absolute error (mae) over the root mean square error (rmse) in assessing average model performance,” Climate research, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 79–82, 2005

    2005

  23. [23]

    The unreasonable ef- fectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,

    Richard Zhang, Phillip Isola, Alexei A Efros, Eli Shechtman, and Oliver Wang, “The unreasonable ef- fectiveness of deep features as a perceptual metric,” in Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, 2018, pp. 586–595

    2018

  24. [24]

    Realityscan,

    Epic Games, “Realityscan,” 2024,https://www. realityscan.com/

    2024

  25. [25]

    Pixelwise view selection for unstructured multi-view stereo,

    Johannes L Sch ¨onberger, Enliang Zheng, Jan-Michael Frahm, and Marc Pollefeys, “Pixelwise view selection for unstructured multi-view stereo,” inEuropean confer- ence on computer vision. Springer, 2016, pp. 501–518

    2016